|
Links 🔗
Why IMAX Beat 3D
Pandemic reasons aside, who even watches 3D movies anymore? I don’t know anybody who genuinely enjoys going to the cinema for 3D, except maybe kids. But I do know many who would gladly pay extra for an IMAX experience. Let’s dive into why IMAX beats 3D 👇👇
Why 3D failed:
It’s 2009 and Avatar is the biggest movie ever, making a $1billion in just 19 days and doubling that a month later. It was the must-see movie event with much credit to its pioneering use of 3D. It seemed like 3D was the big leap in the movie industry, until it wasn’t. Many movies jumped into the 3D pool to ride on Avatar’s success, diluting its novelty (ie. brand dilution). Plus, most of these are not filmed and designed with 3D in mind (unlike Avatar), they’re digitally converted into 3D. This makes it lacklustre, and people can tell that the 3D is just a lazy cash-grab. Besides, our brains already process the depth perception in 2D movies perfectly fine. Adding 3D glasses just becomes a hassle and is nauseating for some.
Why IMAX worked:
Standard films are shot on 35mm print, IMAX is on 70mm print, meaning ultra-widescreen and sharper images. Think standard 4K resolution to a whopping 12K. The larger screen and clearer images make for a more immersive experience, displaying the sense of scale needed in tentpole films, giving it it’s grandiosity. Also, IMAX cameras are big and expensive, only the bigger productions can afford to use them. This means that certain sequences and shots are explicitly designed to take advantage of this format.
If James Cameron introduced 3D to the world with Avatar, Christopher Nolan is the guy for IMAX with The Dark Knight. In 2009, IMAX’s worldwide box office share was 0.9%, by 2019 it’s 3.5%. This doesn’t look like much, but there are far, far fewer IMAX screens than 3D ones (Worldwide: 1500 IMAX screens vs 122,000 3D screens vs 81,000 non-3D screens). I bet 3D didn’t see that coming.
|
